[Dr Laurence Niles]

Re: I hate introductions.

But if a piece of literature (or even any piece of media) can point to itself and proclaim itself to be absolutely true, and the followers of that piece of literature rise up and are convinced it is, does it make it so?

Have you ever read a scientific paper?

Once you slog through the Abstract, Introduction, Method, Results and Discussion what do you get to?

That's right: the conclusion. The reader can read the conclusion, examine the whole paper and either agree or disagree with the paper's conclusion. If you find something in the paper that you do not agree with you will not arrive at the same conclusion as the author.

How is that different from reading the Bible(KJV1611) and concluding that Jesus temporarily died for our sins?

You see, somebody who believes in ToE for example has read 'On the Origins of Species' and believes every part of it.

A Christian believes every single word of the Bible(KJV1611). If he did not he would not be a Christian: one can't claim to hold the Bible(KJV1611) as authoritative but only the bits they like, can they?

You can't claim to beleive that Jesus arose from the dead, healed the blind and turned water into wine but not to beleive that the gaywise should be killed, can you?

The Bible(KJV1611) is either of God or not. People are either convinced by the Bible(KJV1611) based on what it self affirms in EXACTLY the same way that people are convinced by scientific papers based on that THEY self affirm.

Do you see now, how the Bible(KJV1611) is exactly the same as a scientific paper?

YIC